Exmouth has too much employment land says retirement developer*

* How odd – Sidmouth doesn’t have enough employment land and Exmouth has too much – maybe Exmouth could take the companies that want to occupy the Sidford Business Park!

“The planning inspectorate has now set a date of February 5, 2019, to hear arguments for and against a 59-apartment retirement community on land near Tesco, in Salterton Road originally refused by East Devon District Council as the land has been earmarked for commercial use.

In its appeal statement, developer YourLife Management Services – a joint venture between Somerset Care and McCarthy and Stone – argues that the employment allocation is ‘surplus to requirements’ and not a ‘viable’ proposition ‘now or in the near future’.

Ian Cann, vice chairman of the emerging neighbourhood plan – currently being assessed by independent examiners ahead of a public referendum – has urged the planning inspectorate to consider the need for employment land in Exmouth.

He said: “One of the focuses of the neighbourhood plan is for Exmouth to be ‘demographically balanced’ and at the moment it’s out of sync and we need to retain our younger people in the town.

“It’s all well and good giving them a house but they need to have job.

“If you want to retain this people in the town you need to create as many jobs as possible. To do that, we have to identify as much commercial land as possible.

“We have to defend against other uses of land identified for commercial use – we have to defend that to the hilt.”

If the planning inspector agrees with developers, the application, which includes self-contained flats for those over 70 years old, would be approved.

Exmouth Town Council’s planning committee has twice opposed the application, despite the developer putting its case forward.

All previous representations made about the proposal have been forwarded to the planning inspectorate and people have an opportunity to either change or add their comments by Monday, November 12.

Visit https://acp.planninginspectorate.gov.uk or emailing west2@pins.gsi.gov.uk to comment on the plans.

http://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/planning-appeal-date-set-for-rejected-exmouth-retirements-flats-plan-1-5762317

Sidford Business Park: a begged question

If the Sidford Business Park was turned down because of

“the potentially lethal combination of narrow roads and increased heavy goods vehicle usage” …

why was it hurriedly and grubbily added to the Local Plan at the last minute?

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2018/06/18/sidford-business-park-a-grubby-history/

“Planners have said NO to Sidford Business Park and turned down the controversial plans over a potentially lethal combination of narrow roads and increased heavy goods vehicle usage.

East Devon District Council planners rejected plans to build industrial, storage and non-residential institutions on agricultural land to the east of Two Bridges Road in Sidford.

They were refused on the grounds of harm to highway safety, relating to increased heavy goods vehicle usage of the area’s narrow roads and the decision was made by officers with the Chairman of Development Management Committee, Cllr Mike Howe, in accordance with the Council’s Constitution. …”

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/planners-refuse-controversial-sidford-business-2120014

Campaigners will press on with “Say No to Sidford Business Park” activity

Say NO To Sidford Business Park Campaign

Press Release – 16 October 2018

The Campaign is relieved for local residents that the District Council has, for the second time in as many years, refused a planning application to build a Business Park on agricultural AONB land at Sidford.

We are pleased that the views of local residents have been listened to once again. Over 250 residents submitted letters of objection, and 1,400 residents signed this Campaign’s petition objecting to the proposed Business Park.

The proposed Business Park is the wrong thing in the wrong place, and we urge the applicants to end the years of uncertainty and concern that has hung over local residents, particularly those in the immediate vicinity to the site, by publicly stating that they will not pursue this matter to appeal.

Whilst we are pleased that the District Council has refused to give planning permission for a Business Park we are disappointed that the Council has only done so on highways concerns. We believe that the refusal could, and should have been more wide ranging.

Until the applicants end their attempts to build a Business Park on this site the Campaign will continue to do all it can to reflect the clear views of local residents.

EDDC objects to Sidford Business Park ONLY on Highways grounds

Owl says: Well, in Christine Keeler’s famous words [corrected by slap on talons to Mandy Rice Davies!] “Well, they would do, wouldn’t they”!

“East Devon District Council Website – 16 October 2018
News
Sidford employment site outline planning application refused on highway safety grounds

When this content has been created
16 October 2018

Local planning authority’s concerns over a potentially lethal combination of narrow roads and increased heavy goods vehicle usage has resulted in refusal of Sidford business park planning application

East Devon District Council has today (16 October 2018), refused an application for outline planning permission for the Sidford employment site ( – Land East of Two Bridges, Sidford – on the grounds of harm to highway safety, relating to increased heavy goods vehicle (HGVs) usage of the area’s narrow roads. The decision was made by officers with the Chairman of Development Management Committee in accordance with the Council’s Constitution. The meeting was attended by ward members, Cllr David Barrett and Cllr Stuart Hughes.

Details of the application can be viewed on the online applications page of the East Devon website – insert application reference 18/1094/MOUT.

The site is allocated in the adopted East Devon Local Plan and is acceptable in principle, but the allocation is primarily for light industrial uses. The applicants included a significant amount of warehouse space in their application, which would be reliant on HGVs to deliver goods to the site and then distribute them from there. Devon County Council, as Highway Authority, objected to the application based on the number of HGVs likely to be generated by the proposal, which significantly exceeds the figure envisaged when the site was allocated. East Devon District Council has agreed that the numbers of HGVs combined with the narrow roads, both in the vicinity of the site and through Sidbury, would lead to conflict between vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians to the detriment of highway safety, and it was on this basis that the application was turned down.

The planning application has generated comments from 369 people and organisations, of which 255 were objecting to the proposal. A petition of 1,398 residents of the Sidford area and over 200 signatures from the wider area was also received. There were a wide range of objections raised to the application, including concerns regarding flood risk, visual impact, impact upon listed buildings, impact on the area of outstanding natural beauty, light and noise pollution and questions over the need for the business park, which the council considered in detail – many of them having also been considered through the Local Plan examination.

However, the council concluded that the application is acceptable in terms of these matters, with only highways safety amounting to a reason for refusal. In order to progress the development, the applicant now has the choice of appealing against the council’s decision or submitting a revised application to address the concerns raised. Any appeal or further application will be publicised in the usual way and there will be a further opportunity for comments to be made and considered by the council or a Planning Inspector in the case of a an appeal.

Councillor Mike Howe, Chairman of East Devon’s Development Management Committee, said:

I recognise that there is a lot of local opposition to the provision of a business park on this site, but its inclusion in the Local Plan follows an examination by an independent Planning Inspector and the suitability of the site was confirmed by him. Sidmouth needs space to support local businesses and provide jobs and this site is the best location to do that. There were many varied objections to this application but it is only the high level of HGVs that would be drawn to the site, which justifies its refusal.”

Sidford Business Park – Sidmouth Herald ignores hard work of independent councillors

“East Devon District Council (EDDC) announced the news today (Tuesday) that the site would be a ‘detriment to highway safety’ due to the increase of HGV traffic it would bring to inadequate road.

Therefore the controversial plans will not go before its development management committee, as previously expected.

Last week, more than 100 people attended a campaign meeting objecting to the proposed plans for 8,445sqm of employment floor space at the Two Bridges site. …”

Disgracefully, the newspaper then allows two councillors who played very little part in public protest (and one of whom allowed the hasty decision to include it in the Local Plan) and no mention or comment from Independent Councillors (particularly East Devon Alliance councillor Marianne Rixon) who have been constantly doing all the hard work and (at least in this article) none of the recognition.

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/district-council-refuse-sidford-business-park-proposal-1-5738301

Say No to Sidford Business Park meeting

Owl says: notable by his absence was District Councillor and DCC Transport supremo Stuart Hughes, who, it seems, may have preferred going to his gym than attending the meeting:

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2018/10/10/where-was-eddc-and-dcc-transport-councillor-during-the-say-no-to-sidford-business-park-meeting/

“The only way to ensure proposals like the Sidford Business Park and others like it stay in the dustbin of history is for the community to buy it themselves.

Those are the words of campaigners who would like to see the Two Bridges site, where the multi-million pound scheme is proposed, turned into an area for the good of the community – but it would only work if the plans were rejected and the landowners agreed to sell.

More than 100 people attended the latest No Sidford Business Park meeting on Wednesday at St Peter’s Church Hall, Sidford.

Permission is being sought to build 8,445sqm of employment floor space but among the concerns raised are flooding risks and the extra traffic, especially lorries, it could bring to the area’s ‘inadequate’ roads.

During the meeting, John Loudoun from the group, revealed they now had 1,379 signatures on their petition, which opposed the plans and was only carried out in Sidford and Sidbury. And by the time they present the petition to East Devon District Council’s (EDDC) Development and Management Committee, campaigners say it will have more than 1,400 names on it.

John said: “The call to you and everybody out there – and your friends, your family, your neighbours – is please come along on Tuesday, October 30, at 9.15am at The Knowle and be with us when we present the 1,400 signatures to the committee.

“Let’s try now and make sure that this is the second time that we actually kick this planning application and any others like it into the dustbin of history.”

Councillor Marianne Rixson said: “I really can’t see what has changed since last time.

“If we are lucky, it could be refused again, which would leave us potentially facing yet another revised application at some date in the future. But personally, I don’t relish the prospect of wading through another 500-plus pages of documents so I have a radical suggestion. How would you feel about trying to raise the money to buy this land. I can’t promise they would agree to sell but this is the only way we can guarantee that this development or something similar couldn’t happen. Once the Japanese knotweed on the site has been eradicated it could then be a community asset and used for the public good.”

Cllr Rixson said she believed the landowner, Tim Ford, paid around £402,000 for the site.”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/nearly-1-400-residents-say-no-to-sidford-business-park-1-5733085

Where was EDDC and DCC (Transport) councillor during the Say No to Sidford Business Park meeting?

Could he have been here?

“Air pollution linked to greater risk of mouth cancer, finds study”

“High levels of air pollution are linked to an increased risk of mouth cancer, new research has revealed.

Scientists have previously linked high air pollution to a host of health problems, from an increased risk of dementia to asthma and even changes in the structure of the heart, with recent research suggesting there is no “safe level” of air pollution.

Now researchers say that at very high levels of air pollution, the risk of developing mouth cancer appears to rise.

Writing in the Journal of Investigative Medicine, researchers in Taiwan describe how they discovered the association by looking at air pollution data from 66 air quality monitoring stations around the country collected in 2009, and combing this with data from the health records of more than 480,000 men aged 40 and over from 2012/13. In total, there were 1,1617 cases of mouth cancer among participants.

The team focused on tiny particulates of pollution known as PM2.5s, and took the men’s exposure to this air pollution as being based on where they lived. They then sorted the participants into four groups, from lowest to highest levels of exposure.

After taking into account factors including age, exposure to ozone, levels of other particulates, age, smoking status and whether the men chewed betel quid – a mixture of ingredients that includes areca nut and betel leaf and is known to increase the risk of mouth cancer – the researchers found that men exposed to the highest levels of PM2.5s had an increased risk of mouth cancer. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/oct/09/air-pollution-linked-to-greater-risk-of-mouth-cancer-finds-study

“Say No to Sidmouth Business Park” public meeting: 10 October, 7.30 pm, St Peter’s Church Hall

“The Say No to Sidford Business Park group is inviting residents to hear about the campaigns activities in recent months and its newest proposals.

The group is keeping tight-lipped until the meeting next Wednesday (October 10), but says the announcements will demonstrate the depth of local opposition.

John Loudoun from the group said: “I think it’s important to get a sense of what we have been doing over the past few months, in order to try and put it before councillors so they understand the depth of opposition there is to the planning application.

“This has now been going on for a number of months and it is not going anywhere particularly fast. We are going to be making an announcement as we have a proposal to put to the people.”

The meeting will start at 7pm, in St Peter’s Church Hall, Sidford, on Wednesday.”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/say-no-to-sidford-business-park-campaigners-to-hold-another-public-meeting-1-5726601

“Living in a polluted area increases the risk of dementia by up to 40 per cent”

Traffic to and from business parks on main roads … heavy goods vehicles … multi-drop deliveries … taking cars for short journeys … built up towns … we have it all.

“Thousands of cases of the illness could be prevented every year by cutting traffic fumes, said researchers who have added to growing evidence that dirty urban air can damage the brain.

Polluted air is known to cause lung and heart problems as tiny soot particles and chemicals such as nitrogen dioxide (NO2) pass deep into the body.

Research is also increasingly linking traffic fumes to thinking problems. Last year a Canadian study of 2.2 million people concluded that those who lived continuously near a busy road were 12 per cent more likely to get dementia.

Scientists now say that Britain’s higher pollution levels may make the risk even greater in this country after looking at data on 131,000 Londoners aged above 50, of whom 2,200 developed dementia over seven years.

The research cannot prove a causal link but it found that people living in the fifth of areas with the highest levels of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) were 20 per cent more likely to get dementia during the study. Those exposed to the highest fifth of NO2 levels were 40 per cent more likely to get dementia even after adjusting for age, class and other health habits, according to results in the journal BMJ Open.

Frank Kelly, of King’s College London, senior author of the study, said that while the results were not conclusive “it is increasingly appreciated that the impacts of air pollution on health are seen far beyond the lungs”.

He said it was “very likely that high air pollution alone does not cause dementia but rather it increases the risk of an individual developing it”, adding: “Air pollution is linked with many more conditions than dementia and therefore there is now overwhelming evidence that we should be improving air quality in cities to improve public health.”

Traffic fumes, particularly from diesel, are the main sources of PM2.5 and NO2 and Professor Kelly said that ministers had a responsibility to cut pollution. He advised people wanting to minimise their exposure to “plan low-pollution routes and try to avoid rush hour”.

He added that indoors, people could decrease emissions by not burning candles or having open fires and by increasing ventilation when cooking.

Exactly how pollution harms the brain is not fully understood, nor how long people need to be living in polluted areas to be at risk, as the study looked only at pollution exposures at one point in time. Professor Kelly said that damage was likely to build up over years or decades as the result of inflammation and other reactions to pollution.

“We thus hypothesise that it is these reactions by our body to elevated pollution occurring over and over again that leads to the eventual tissue damage such as to the lungs, blood vessels or brain,” he said. The study suggested that each extra microgram per cubic metre of PM2.5 increased dementia risk by 7 per cent, compared with 1 per cent in the Canadian research. Professor Kelly said: “The pollution concentrations in London are higher and this would be the most likely explanation.”

He estimated that bringing pollution down to the lowest levels seen in London could prevent 7 per cent of all dementia cases in the study. With 210,000 people developing dementia each year in Britain, cleaner air could result in a “significant public health gain” he said.

Martie van Tongeren, of the University of Manchester, said: “There is a growing body of evidence of the link between air pollution and brain health, including dementia and Alzheimer’s. This study adds to this . . . As most people in the UK live in urban areas, exposure to traffic-related and other air pollutants is ubiquitous. Hence, even a relatively small increase in risk will result in a large public health impact.”

With no treatment for Alzheimer’s, experts increasingly believe that preventing the condition is the best hope of mitigating its toll. However, James Pickett, of the Alzheimer’s Society, said that despite the evidence that pollution particles could reach the brain the link was still uncertain. “We need more robust research into how pollution affects brain health before we can decide whether we should get out of the city and move to Emmerdale,” he said.

David Reynolds, of Alzheimer’s Research UK, said it was possible that other diseases not measured by the study could skew the results, as could differences in diagnosis rates by GP surgeries. “The diseases that cause dementia can begin in the brain up to 20 years before symptoms start to show. We don’t know where people in this study lived in the two decades before their dementia diagnosis, so we have to be cautious about how we interpret these results,” he said.

“The link between air pollution and dementia risk is a growing area of research. This study highlights the importance of further studies that look into exposure to pollution over a longer period of time.”

Source: Times (pay wall)

Air pollution particles found in placentasof pregnant women

Sidford residents – and anyone living on a busy road – take note. The Clean Air Act cannot protect us.

“Scientists have found the first evidence that particles of air pollution travel through pregnant women’s lungs and lodge in their placentas.

Toxic air is already strongly linked to harm in foetuses but how the damage is done is unknown. The new study, involving mothers living in London, UK, revealed sooty particles in the placentas of each of their babies and researchers say it is quite possible the particles entered the foetuses too.

“It is a worrying problem – there is a massive association between air pollution a mother breathes in and the effect it has on the foetus,” said Dr Lisa Miyashita, at Queen Mary University of London, one of the research team. “It is always good if possible to take less polluted routes if you are pregnant – or indeed if you are not pregnant. I avoid busy roads when I walk to the station.”

A series of previous studies have shown that air pollution significantly increases the risk of premature birth and of low birth weight, leading to lifelong damage to health. A large study of more than 500,000 births in London, published in December, confirmed the link and led doctors to say that the implications for many millions of women in polluted cities around the world are “something approaching a public health catastrophe”.

Air pollution harm to unborn babies may be global health catastrophe, warn doctors

Scientists are increasingly finding that air pollution results in health problems far beyond the lungs. In August, research revealed that air pollution causes a “huge” reduction in intelligence, while in 2016 toxic nanoparticles from air pollution were discovered in human brains. …

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/sep/16/air-pollution-particles-found-in-mothers-placentas

What will happen in Cranbrook and Sidford if pavement parking is made illegal?

“Motorists should be banned from parking on pavements to prevent pedestrians having to walk on the road, ministers have been told.

A coalition of charities is calling on the Department for Transport (DfT) to fast-track legislation designed to bar drivers from mounting the kerb.

In a letter to The Times, the groups criticise the government for “stalling” over the issue and say that action is needed to stop cars on congested streets spilling over on to the pavement.

The issue is particularly pressing for parents with prams, the elderly, those with disabilities and people who are blind and partially sighted, they say.

The letter is signed by 20 charities including the Guide Dogs for the Blind Association, Living Streets, Age UK, British Cycling, Scope and The Ramblers. An open letter to the prime minister signed by 16,000 members of the public has also been delivered.

It follows a statement from the DfT this year that it was considering an overhaul of traffic laws to prevent vehicles from blocking paths. This would bring the rest of England into line with London, which has banned pavement parking, except where specifically allowed by councils, since 1974. Outside the capital, local authorities have long pushed for the change, saying it was a “nonsense” that those outside London were treated differently. It could allow councils to make it illegal to park on the kerb unless they expressly grant permission, potentially carrying fines of £50 or £70.

Almost three years ago the DfT suggested that a review of the law would be carried out as part of reforms designed to promote more cycling and walking, but it never materialised.

Today’s letter notes that it has been 1,000 days since ministers first proposed to take action. “Cars parked on the pavements force people into the road to face oncoming traffic, which is particularly dangerous for many, including blind and partially sighted people, parents with pushchairs and young children, wheelchair users and others who use mobility aids,” it says.

Xavier Brice, chief executive of Sustrans, the walking and cycling charity, said: “We strongly support a banning of pavement parking. It is particularly dangerous for those who are blind and partially sighted, other less able people and people with push chairs.”

The DfT said: “We recognise the importance of making sure that pavement parking doesn’t put pedestrians at risk, and believe councils are best placed to make decisions about local restrictions.

“Councils already have the powers to ban drivers from parking on pavements and we are considering whether more can be done to make it easier for them to tackle problem areas. It is important to get this right for all pavement users.”

Source: Times, pay wall

Contact info for “Say No to Sidford Business Park”

via EDDC Independent East Devon Alliance councillor Marianne Rixson:

Email: mrixson@eastdevon.gov.uk

Mobile: 07789 873098

Telephone: 01395 576727

Address: 22 Sid Vale Close, Sidford, Sidmouth EX10 9PH

“Air pollution causes ‘huge’ reduction in intelligence, study reveals”

Not good news for people on the route of the Sidford Fields Industrial Estate – or anyone in any of the villages close to Exeter that EDDC wants to expand.

“Air pollution causes a “huge” reduction in intelligence, according to new research, indicating that the damage to society of toxic air is far deeper than the well-known impacts on physical health.

The research was conducted in China but is relevant across the world, with 95% of the global population breathing unsafe air. It found that high pollution levels led to significant drops in test scores in language and arithmetic, with the average impact equivalent to having lost a year of the person’s education.

“Polluted air can cause everyone to reduce their level of education by one year, which is huge,” said Xi Chen at Yale School of Public Health in the US, a member of the research team. “But we know the effect is worse for the elderly, especially those over 64, and for men, and for those with low education. If we calculate [the loss] for those, it may be a few years of education.”

Previous research has found that air pollution harms cognitive performance in students, but this is the first to examine people of all ages and the difference between men and women.

The damage in intelligence was worst for those over 64 years old, with serious consequences, said Chen: “We usually make the most critical financial decisions in old age.” Rebecca Daniels, from the UK public health charity Medact, said: “This report’s findings are extremely worrying.” “

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/aug/27/air-pollution-causes-huge-reduction-in-intelligence-study-reveals

Swire opposes Sidford Business Park

“Hundreds of people have lodged objections against the controversial application to create 8,445 sq m of employment floor space at the Two Bridges site.

The plans, which could create 250 jobs, represents 37 per cent of what was previously proposed and submitted to East Devon District Council (EDDC) in 2016.

Sir Hugo has hit out at the plans and raised concerns, slamming it as an ‘unwanted development in the wrong place’.

In a letter to East Devon District Council’s leader Councillor Ian Thomas, Sir Hugo said: “We have already seen Sidford absorbed by Sidmouth. It was because of this that I objected to a proposal for a cycle path between Sidford and Sidbury as I believed it would not be long before someone insisted on an illuminated path which could lead to gradual urbanisation between the two.

“Likewise, it seems to me to build a business park between Sidford and Sidbury, albeit nearer to Sidford, is an unwanted development in the wrong place.

“You will be familiar with the well-rehearsed arguments both for and against but I cannot see how this proposed development would do anything but detract from the area and to lead to more congestion and pollution on what is an already overused road.

“Equally I cannot see why the Alexandria Business Park could not be properly redeveloped to accommodate any need for new light industrial space.”

Sir Hugo then urged the council to turn the ‘unwanted’ planning application down.

Say No to Sidford Business Park campaigners held a protest last week that was attended by more than 80 people.

Petitioners have also been going door-to-door to gauge people’s views.

A Say No to Sidford Business Park spokesman said: “Obviously we welcome the position taken by Sir Hugo on what is a very important issue for local people. On this matter, we feel he has got it completely right.”

When the Herald went to press, EDDC had received 368 comments about the application, 254 of which were objections and 111 of which were in support.”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/mp-sir-hugo-swire-opposes-plans-for-new-business-park-at-sidford-1-5637131

Bad news for Sidford – delivery vans blamed for rise of 2.5 million vehicles on roads in last 5 years

One for DCC Councillor Stuart Hughes – in charge of roads and transport.

“If you wonder why you seem to be stuck in a never-ending traffic jam these days, there was an answer last night.

The number of vehicles on our roads has leapt by an astonishing two and a half million in the last five years.

With the UK population hitting 66 million last year and as more of us turn to online shopping, a surge in the number of delivery vans has been blamed for increased gridlock in many town centres.

Last year there were 2,460,900 more vehicles on England’s road when compared with five years ago in 2013 – an increase of 7.7 per cent.

Over the same period, road space increased by just 0.6 per cent, according to the latest figures by the Local Government Association.

This means there are significantly more vehicles per mile of road leading to increased congestion, air pollution and more wear and tear on our roads.

Chancellor Philip Hammond has identified traffic as one of the factors holding back productivity, with people spending too much time travelling and not enough time working. …”

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6000761/Number-vehicles-roads-2-5million-five-years-delivery-vans-blamed.html

80+ people protest against proposed Sidford business park

“Protestors made their feelings clear as part of a march saying ‘no’ to the proposed multi-million pound business park development in Sidford.

In excess of 80 people turned up to the ‘Say No to Sidford Business Park’ campaign event on Monday.

Residents were armed with homemade placards voicing their opposition to the application, which is looking to create 8,445 sq m of employment floor space on the Two Bridges site.

Councillor Marianne Rixson said that there was more than 1.6million sq ft of commercial property available in Exeter and Honiton catering for B1, B2, and B8 business use.

The plans also did not ‘conserve and enhance’ the area under the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) guidelines.

She told the crowd: “This development is going to be within our AONB which is precious.

“The height of these buildings are going to be raised by 1.5m for them to flood proof the site, which with the 7.5m on top is going to be 9m high – that is twice the height of a normal bungalow.

“There is a duty to conserve and enhance, this is not going to do either.

“Also it says it should be in exceptional circumstances; we have very low unemployment and there is plenty of property elsewhere, where is the exceptional need?”

The youngest protester at the event was just two years old, with many children joining adults to raise their concerns about developing in the AONB.

Sidbury pupil Billy Bonfield, aged six, said: “I do not want people to build a big industrial estate.”

His mum Becky added: “He goes to Sidbury School, there’s always gnarl ups on the road – it’s just not big enough.”

Concerned cyclist Sue Dyson said: “I’m in fear for my life going up School Lane. If there is more traffic, I think I wouldn’t be able to do it, it’s bad enough as it is in.”

Graham Cooper added: “The best idea is to redistribute the employment space across the area and develop brown field sites first.

“You mustn’t go and develop AONB land unless there’s proven to be a need.”

Campaigners are currently taking to the streets of Sidford and Sidbury with a petition which they will look to present to East Devon District Council.

The campaign has raised £750 so far to spend on signs and posters and urged people to keep donating.”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/residents-march-against-plans-for-sidford-business-park-1-5624746

Sidford Business Park – this IS just a coincidence isn’t it?

“More than £100k in funding earmark for pothole repairs in Sidmouth and Otter Valley … “

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/more-than-100k-in-funding-earmark-for-pothole-repairs-in-sidmouth-and-otter-valley-1-5582332

“A protest opposing the plans for a multi-million pound business park at Sidford will be held next month”

“Campaigners have also launched a petition and have called on residents to join forces and back their efforts.

So far, more than 200 objections have been lodged against the application to create 8,445sqm of employment floor space on the Two Bridges site.

The plans, which could create 250 jobs, represents 37 per cent of what was previously proposed and submitted to East Devon District Council (EDDC) in 2016.

When the Herald went to press, a total of 232 comments had been submitted to EDDC – this included 211 objections and 20 supporters.

From Monday, July 9, Say No to Sidford Business Park campaigners have said they will be going door-to-door in Sidford and Sidbury in order to obtain signatures for their petition, in the first instance.

Volunteers then plan to submit the signatures to EDDC before the authority’s Development Management Committee makes a decision on the application.

Anyone who would be interested in volunteering on one or more of the days between July 9 and 12, from 6pm until 8pm, has been asked to come forward to help collect signatures.

Campaigners will also have street stalls in the centre of Sidmouth on Saturday, July 14 and Saturday, July 21.

Volunteers will be collecting signatures for the petition and will be seeking help from anyone who would like to help with the Say No to Sidford Business Park drive.

A campaign spokesperson said they would be running a number of initiatives throughout July.

A protest will be held on Monday, July 23, between 4pm and 5.30pm. Further details will be released closer to the time.

A spokesperson said: “We would like to thank everyone who has so far put a ‘NO Sidford Business Park’ poster in their window.

“This is an easy way of showing your opposition to the planning application.

“Please print and display the poster and give copies to friends and neighbours to put up.

“If you know of someone who you want to receive our emails then let us have their email address and we will add it to the extensive contact list.

“Thank you for the many messages of support that we have received.”

For more information email nosidfordbusinesspark@yahoo.com.”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/protest-to-be-held-oposing-sidford-business-park-1-5582304